ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Claude Opus 5

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning comes out ahead, 69 to 37 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    NVIDIA

    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning

    Released Apr 28, 2026

    69/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.25 / $0.85
    • Context256K
  2. Anthropic

    Claude Opus 5

    Released Jul 24, 2026

    37/100
    • ECI162.9
    • Price$5.00 / $25.00
    • Context1M
  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning is our pick

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 against Claude Opus 5 (37). It leads on price and inputs & features. Claude Opus 5 wins on context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

  • CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
  • Lowest priceNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B ReasoningNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning $0.40 · Claude Opus 5 $10.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextClaude Opus 5Claude Opus 5 1,000,000 · Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning 256,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B ReasoningNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning: Text, Images, Audio, Video · Claude Opus 5: Text, Images, PDFs
  • Self-hostingNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B ReasoningPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B ReasoningClaude Opus 5
Price50%692
Inputs & features30%9080
Context window20%3660
Overall100%69/10037/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Claude Opus 5 specifications side by side
SpecificationNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B ReasoningNVIDIAClaude Opus 5Anthropic
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)—162.9
ECI rank—#5 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—93.9%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—85.6%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—98.9%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—59.9%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.25 (best)$5.00
Output$0.85 (best)$25.00
Cached input—$0.50
Blended (3:1)$0.40 (best)$10.00
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 4 providersOfficial Anthropic API
Limits
Context window256,000 tokens1,000,000 tokens (best)
Max output65,536 tokens128,000 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsNoYes
AudioYesNo
VideoYesNo
ReasoningYesYeslow · medium · high · xhigh · max
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesYes
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietary
API model IDnvidia/nemotron-3-nano-omni-30b-a3b-reasoningclaude-opus-5
API providers835 (best)
ReleasedApr 28, 2026Jul 24, 2026
Knowledge cutoff—May 2026
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning$4.20
  • Claude Opus 5$100.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning or Claude Opus 5?

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 against Claude Opus 5 (37). It leads on price and inputs & features. Claude Opus 5 wins on context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

Which is cheaper, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning or Claude Opus 5?

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning is cheaper at $0.25 input / $0.85 output per million tokens (median across 4 API providers; free on Nvidia). Claude Opus 5 costs $5.00 input / $25.00 output per million tokens (official Anthropic API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.40 per million tokens for Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning versus $10.00 for Claude Opus 5 (25× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning has not been scored yet and Claude Opus 5 has an ECI of 162.9.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning and Claude Opus 5 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 5 has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 256,000 for Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning. Maximum output per response: Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning up to 65,536, Claude Opus 5 up to 128,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning accepts text, images, audio and video; Claude Opus 5 accepts text, images and PDFs. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Claude Opus 5 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Claude Opus 5 is the newest, released Jul 24, 2026. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning came out Apr 28, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Opus 5 May 2026.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.